On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 6:43 PM,
wrote:
>
> Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2017 15:25:37 -0700
> From: Warren Young
> Subject: Re: [fossil-users] Fossil-NG ideas
>
> On Nov 21, 2017, at 2:09 PM, Ron W wrote:
> >
> > While I like the idea of a "smart default" for the
On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 07:01:31PM -0500, Richard Hipp wrote:
> > (2) Store true differential manifests.
>
> I'm thinking that Fossil-NG will probably do like Git and store
> separate artifacts holding the content of each directory. (Git calls
> these "Tree Objects"). I need to do more research,
On 11/22/17, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
>
> (1) The need to parse all artifacts on clone. Artificates should be
> strongly typed, i.e. the system should at the very least distinguish
> fully between "content" blobs and "meta data" blobs. Only the latter
> have and should be parsed.
That is a good
On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 01:33:11PM -0700, Warren Young wrote:
> I see a new wiki article:
>
> https://www.fossil-scm.org/index.html/wiki?name=Fossil-NG
There are two central design flaws in Fossil that affect larger
repositories and those are the repos that primarily benefit from
narrow/shall
On Nov 21, 2017, at 2:09 PM, Ron W wrote:
>
> While I like the idea of a "smart default" for the file name, I'd rather have
> an "--open" (or "-o") option to trigger the automatic "fossil open”.
So…you want to remain more difficult to use than Git in this regard?
That’s not very Fossil.
(Yes,
On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 4:09 PM,
wrote:
>
> Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2017 16:08:20 -0500
> From: Richard Hipp
>
> The overhead for a small batch of commits non-zero but it is
> manageable. A full clone, on the other hand, is too expensive. To
> give Fossil the ability to service clone requests from gi
On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 5:22 PM,
wrote:
>
> Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2017 13:33:11 -0700
> From: Warren Young
> Subject: [fossil-users] Fossil-NG ideas
>
> There is one more thing Git really gets right compared to Fossil:
> single-step clone-and-open. We should be able to do the same:
>
> $ fossil
OK. My mistake. I misunderstood the post.
Cheers,
Offray
On 20/11/17 18:04, Warren Young wrote:
> On Nov 20, 2017, at 3:41 PM, Offray Vladimir Luna Cárdenas
> wrote:
>> On 20/11/17 17:22, Warren Young wrote:
>>> On Nov 20, 2017, at 3:12 PM, Offray Vladimir Luna Cárdenas
>>> wrote:
I th
On Nov 20, 2017, at 4:04 PM, Warren Young wrote:
>
> Git allows you to do this in 2 steps: clone & cd. Fossil currently requires
> 5, as I showed up-thread.
4 steps. The fifth step in the post starting this thread is part of a separate
thought.
___
On Nov 20, 2017, at 3:41 PM, Offray Vladimir Luna Cárdenas
wrote:
>
> On 20/11/17 17:22, Warren Young wrote:
>> On Nov 20, 2017, at 3:12 PM, Offray Vladimir Luna Cárdenas
>> wrote:
>>> I thought that was the extension
>>> the shallow cloned repository would get if no extension name was specifi
On Nov 20, 2017, at 1:33 PM, Warren Young wrote:
>
> There is one more thing Git really gets right compared to Fossil: single-step
> clone-and-open. We should be able to do the same:
I’ve prototyped this as a simple shell script:
#!/bin/sh -e
url=$1
shift
tmprepo=`mktemp .fslrepo-X
On 20/11/17 17:22, Warren Young wrote:
> On Nov 20, 2017, at 3:12 PM, Offray Vladimir Luna Cárdenas
> wrote:
>> I thought that was the extension
>> the shallow cloned repository would get if no extension name was specified.
> If you say
>
> $ fossil clone https://fossil-scm.org fossil
>
> Y
On Nov 20, 2017, at 3:12 PM, Offray Vladimir Luna Cárdenas
wrote:
>
> I thought that was the extension
> the shallow cloned repository would get if no extension name was specified.
If you say
$ fossil clone https://fossil-scm.org fossil
You get a repository file called “fossil”, not “foss
On 20/11/17 17:01, Warren Young wrote:
> On Nov 20, 2017, at 2:55 PM, Offray Vladimir Luna Cárdenas
> wrote:
>> On 20/11/17 16:45, Carlo Miron wrote:
>>> On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 9:33 PM, Warren Young wrote:
>>>
When the FILENAME parameter is not given, it produces a “Fossil”
subdire
On Nov 20, 2017, at 2:55 PM, Offray Vladimir Luna Cárdenas
wrote:
>
> On 20/11/17 16:45, Carlo Miron wrote:
>> On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 9:33 PM, Warren Young wrote:
>>
>>> When the FILENAME parameter is not given, it produces a “Fossil”
>>> subdirectory containing the contents of tip-of-trunk,
On 20/11/17 16:45, Carlo Miron wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 9:33 PM, Warren Young wrote:
>
>
>> There is one more thing Git really gets right compared to Fossil:
>> single-step clone-and-open. We should be able to do the same:
>>
>> $ fossil clone https://fossil-scm.org
>>
>> When the
On Nov 20, 2017, at 1:33 PM, Warren Young wrote:
>
> I see a new wiki article:
>
>https://www.fossil-scm.org/index.html/wiki?name=Fossil-NG
Shallow clones bear some thinking, too.
Let us posit that “fossil clone” takes a -shallow option with no argument,
telling it to fetch only the artif
On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 9:33 PM, Warren Young wrote:
> There is one more thing Git really gets right compared to Fossil: single-step
> clone-and-open. We should be able to do the same:
>
> $ fossil clone https://fossil-scm.org
>
> When the FILENAME parameter is not given, it produces a “Fo
18 matches
Mail list logo